GamersNexus does probably more research than a video deserves though. I've always found the accuracy levels of the LTT videos acceptable; I think GN might be sort of spuriously demanding rigor here.
Harassment is no good and must be stopped, though.
That might just be an Inscryption/Wine compatibility problem. You should check maybe ProtonDB or WineHQ for the game to see if this is a known problem or if there is a particular Wine or Proton version you need to use or a particular library or setting that is needed to make sound work on Linux for the Windows version of this particular game.
Lawsuits don't generally just throw themselves out. You have to pay a lawyer to show up and ask the judge to throw out the lawsuit on account of the fact that you don't host the thing, or whatever the reason is.
Judges don't go out and do research; if one side's lawyer says Whirlybird runs The Pirate Bay out of their kitchen and the other side's lawyer isn't there, then the court is going to proceed as though that is at least plausible.
I actually kind of like the error handling. Code should explain why something was a problem, not just where it was a problem. You get a huge string of "couldn't foobar the baz: target baz was not greebleable: no greeble provider named fizzbuzz", and while the strings are long as hell they are much better explanations for a problem than a stack trace is.
Because you want to know if the first half of the code works at all before you write the whole second half.
Finding all the bits that will be used by the second half and changing the declarations to just expressions is a bunch of extra work. As is adding placeholder code to use the declared variables.
They don't try to make it difficult, but they make code changes that make it clear they have no concern for anyone who might be trying to use the engine anywhere other than in a retail build of Firefox, without providing things like deprecation warnings or upgrade paths.
It looks like you might be able to solve the second problem by pinning an up link?
The first problem is maybe that there are 2 bands to use here (5 GHz and 2.4 GHz), but you have 3 links:
Device to last router
Last router to middle router
Middle router to main router
They can't all be on different bands, so if the links that are on the same band end up using overlapping channels, that can cut the maximum throughput down from what it would be for uncontested use of whatever channel width is used.
Also, one of these links is probably on 2.4 GHz. There's really only one 80 MHz channel there, and also you shouldn't just use the whole thing because your neighbors have wifi and you have Bluetooth.
I don't think you are physically able to push more than 600 megabits through this setup, using all of 2.4 GHz and ignoring interference between the links. If you use just half the 2.4 GHz band, and you have to stop half the time while your neighbor and/or one of the other links in the system transmits, maybe you would get 143 Mbps? And Internet is indeed often faster then that now.
Maybe you can move all the links to non-overlapping parts of 5 GHz? But the wifi bands are only so wide and everyone has to share, so it's not really feasible to get them to push as much data as a physically isolated fiber or coax Internet link can physically do.
GamersNexus does probably more research than a video deserves though. I've always found the accuracy levels of the LTT videos acceptable; I think GN might be sort of spuriously demanding rigor here.
Harassment is no good and must be stopped, though.